Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Next
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
Twitch
YouTube
Facebook (EN Publishing)
Facebook (EN World)
Twitter
Instagram
TikTok
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*TTRPGs General
Worlds of Design: The Lost Art of Running Away
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Ilbranteloth" data-source="post: 8064769" data-attributes="member: 6778044"><p>The PCs in my campaign run away quite a bit. I think the reasons are several:</p><p></p><p>First, we play a less 'superheroic' campaign. And by that I mean that our version of 5e scales back the special abilities. We prefer the characters to be more grounded and more like the rest of the world. I've mentioned this many times, but our approach to a hero is more classical, 'an ordinary person doing extraordinary things,' rather than the 'PCs are a cut above, they are special, they are more powerful than the normal population.' approach.</p><p></p><p>They are also more grounded in the setting, with more 'real-world' ambitions, like raising a family or owning a business, etc. It's not uncommon for PCs to retire and still play a part in the campaign, but infrequently. They consider the consequences of death as having an impact on other people they love that are back home. </p><p></p><p>I also prefer the older style design where the encounters were often designed to be much more dangerous. A handful of goblins isn't a big deal, but dozens are. We tend to stick at either 4th level or 8th level, but the dangers do not. Running away, investigating, and planning are all viable and frequently used tactics to move forward as a result.</p><p></p><p>We tend not to follow the BBEG model. That is, there might often be an important villain, such as a local mob-boss style NPC. But that doesn't address the much, much larger organization behind them, which is too large to defeat entirely. The 1e/2e Zhentarim are a good example. James Bond and SPECTRE another one.</p><p></p><p>Combat is rarely their first choice to solve a problem, and often not even their second or third. In part this is because combat is dangerous and seen as just another obstacle to something else, rather than the purpose itself. Think of it like the Fellowship in Moria, the goal was to get through Moria, not to explore, plunder, and clear it of the goblins/orcs that had overrun it. Combat is often inevitable, but the PCs try to avoid it where they can.</p><p></p><p>We also modify the rules, in particular initiative and the turn-based combat system. When combat resembles a game of freeze-tag, then it's hard to envision running away. We separate movement from creature's turns, and it occurs naturally as we describe the combat. It makes it much, much easier to initiate and envision chase sequences or, perhaps more frequently, combat on the move. Again, think Moria - fighting specifically to move forward, rather than standing your ground to defeat them first and then proceed when you have. </p><p></p><p>We also don't base opportunity attacks on most movement in combat. That's one of the things that has made combat very 'sticky' in 5e. Compare 5e combat to something like boxing. In boxing you are usually just out of reach of your opponent, turning and running away wouldn't be a challenge. Opportunity attacks occur when you try to close to make your attack. Because that's when you're entering their reach and the risk of attack. This is the same in fencing as well.</p><p></p><p>In the end, combat is made more dangerous by these and other approaches in our game. Whenever possible, enemies will try to avoid attacking unless they have superior position and/or numbers. When they can, this immediately puts the PCs at a disadvantage. One that requires them to try to alter the situation to avoid heavy losses simply due to attrition. Because of that, the PCs do their best to control when it does happen.</p><p></p><p>I guess the general design approach is that the PCs are almost always the underdog in our campaign. Which immediately alters their approach to engaging in combat. It's very clear right from the start that combat is dangerous and should be engaged only when you can't avoid it, and if at all possible, you are pretty sure you'll win.</p><p></p><p>As a quick example, I have a tomb scenario that I've used many times to introduce new players to my game. The first part is almost entirely destroyed by time and natural forces, like a stream. Traps are non-functioning but were clearly deadly, there is some treasure, and natural creatures (stirges, giant insects, animals, etc.) and natural challenges (pit traps, etc.). The second part is plundered, but still holds some more deadly traps that have yet to be sprung, with some undead or construct guardians that may still be present. In addition, there are the remains of clearly much more powerful adventurers, mostly plundered as well. The treasure that remains is mostly of the type that is too large to easily move (furniture, tapestries, etc.). The third part is the undisturbed tomb itself. There is great treasure, but it's clear that whatever is protecting it has not been awakened or triggered. Smart adventurers will choose to leave it and come back later. Occasionally they don't take the (obvious) hints, and we're making new characters. We make at least 3 characters at a time, and they can switch them in and out at appropriate moments. A TPK after the first few weeks of playing is as good a spot as any. For the parties that didn't take the hint, they love it. It clearly tells them what to expect for the future and they adjust accordingly.</p><p></p><p>Another common encounter I have is with a bear, that is startled, attacks one PC and then flees. More often than not, the single attack from a bear is very dangerous for a 1st-4th level PC. I wouldn't want to be face-to-face with a bear in real life, and it's important that the PCs feel the same way. </p><p></p><p>So make it obvious that it's an option (and sometimes preferred), and tweak rules that get in the way.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Ilbranteloth, post: 8064769, member: 6778044"] The PCs in my campaign run away quite a bit. I think the reasons are several: First, we play a less 'superheroic' campaign. And by that I mean that our version of 5e scales back the special abilities. We prefer the characters to be more grounded and more like the rest of the world. I've mentioned this many times, but our approach to a hero is more classical, 'an ordinary person doing extraordinary things,' rather than the 'PCs are a cut above, they are special, they are more powerful than the normal population.' approach. They are also more grounded in the setting, with more 'real-world' ambitions, like raising a family or owning a business, etc. It's not uncommon for PCs to retire and still play a part in the campaign, but infrequently. They consider the consequences of death as having an impact on other people they love that are back home. I also prefer the older style design where the encounters were often designed to be much more dangerous. A handful of goblins isn't a big deal, but dozens are. We tend to stick at either 4th level or 8th level, but the dangers do not. Running away, investigating, and planning are all viable and frequently used tactics to move forward as a result. We tend not to follow the BBEG model. That is, there might often be an important villain, such as a local mob-boss style NPC. But that doesn't address the much, much larger organization behind them, which is too large to defeat entirely. The 1e/2e Zhentarim are a good example. James Bond and SPECTRE another one. Combat is rarely their first choice to solve a problem, and often not even their second or third. In part this is because combat is dangerous and seen as just another obstacle to something else, rather than the purpose itself. Think of it like the Fellowship in Moria, the goal was to get through Moria, not to explore, plunder, and clear it of the goblins/orcs that had overrun it. Combat is often inevitable, but the PCs try to avoid it where they can. We also modify the rules, in particular initiative and the turn-based combat system. When combat resembles a game of freeze-tag, then it's hard to envision running away. We separate movement from creature's turns, and it occurs naturally as we describe the combat. It makes it much, much easier to initiate and envision chase sequences or, perhaps more frequently, combat on the move. Again, think Moria - fighting specifically to move forward, rather than standing your ground to defeat them first and then proceed when you have. We also don't base opportunity attacks on most movement in combat. That's one of the things that has made combat very 'sticky' in 5e. Compare 5e combat to something like boxing. In boxing you are usually just out of reach of your opponent, turning and running away wouldn't be a challenge. Opportunity attacks occur when you try to close to make your attack. Because that's when you're entering their reach and the risk of attack. This is the same in fencing as well. In the end, combat is made more dangerous by these and other approaches in our game. Whenever possible, enemies will try to avoid attacking unless they have superior position and/or numbers. When they can, this immediately puts the PCs at a disadvantage. One that requires them to try to alter the situation to avoid heavy losses simply due to attrition. Because of that, the PCs do their best to control when it does happen. I guess the general design approach is that the PCs are almost always the underdog in our campaign. Which immediately alters their approach to engaging in combat. It's very clear right from the start that combat is dangerous and should be engaged only when you can't avoid it, and if at all possible, you are pretty sure you'll win. As a quick example, I have a tomb scenario that I've used many times to introduce new players to my game. The first part is almost entirely destroyed by time and natural forces, like a stream. Traps are non-functioning but were clearly deadly, there is some treasure, and natural creatures (stirges, giant insects, animals, etc.) and natural challenges (pit traps, etc.). The second part is plundered, but still holds some more deadly traps that have yet to be sprung, with some undead or construct guardians that may still be present. In addition, there are the remains of clearly much more powerful adventurers, mostly plundered as well. The treasure that remains is mostly of the type that is too large to easily move (furniture, tapestries, etc.). The third part is the undisturbed tomb itself. There is great treasure, but it's clear that whatever is protecting it has not been awakened or triggered. Smart adventurers will choose to leave it and come back later. Occasionally they don't take the (obvious) hints, and we're making new characters. We make at least 3 characters at a time, and they can switch them in and out at appropriate moments. A TPK after the first few weeks of playing is as good a spot as any. For the parties that didn't take the hint, they love it. It clearly tells them what to expect for the future and they adjust accordingly. Another common encounter I have is with a bear, that is startled, attacks one PC and then flees. More often than not, the single attack from a bear is very dangerous for a 1st-4th level PC. I wouldn't want to be face-to-face with a bear in real life, and it's important that the PCs feel the same way. So make it obvious that it's an option (and sometimes preferred), and tweak rules that get in the way. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*TTRPGs General
Worlds of Design: The Lost Art of Running Away
Top